A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

thats why I like Monero, ethics and sound math, code is being worked on, the only anonymous crypto worth any money/attention.

respectfully disagree.

SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth.

That would be true if the implementation were as mature and well-developed, and if you continue to follow our research lead on how various edge conditions in cryptonote need to be addressed.

Quote

the diffs r that SDC is a BTC fork so is ready for B2B use toady with a gorgeous GUI wallet, something Monero users have long wished for.

I believe the phrase "magic wallet" has been bandied around thr XMR thread. what is the ETA btw?

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

But getting back on point:

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.

whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point… the fact SDC is a BTC fork should mean B2B is pretty much setup already, no?

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.

whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote

IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.

...As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?...

It is fair to say that one area Monero is still lacking is a GUI Wallet for GNU/Linux. Yes there is myMonero.com but that is an alternative to blockchain.info. The choice faced by one wishing to run one's own Monero client is 1) Learn the GNU/Linux terminal or 2) Run the risk of providing one's private keys to the NSA via Microsoft’s membership in the PRISM program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29. Of course those of use willing to learn the GNU/Linux terminal can take advantage of the current situation and purchase cheap XMR. My take is this situation will not last long; however in the meantime this may well be a reason why DRK is still trading at over 5X the capitalization of XMR.

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.

whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote

IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.

1) Let me firstly say thanks for your answers.2) but if the DB was "stable" it would be out of RAM, yes? Or to get to the point why is it still in RAM?

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.

whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote

IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.

1) Let me firstly say thanks for your answers.2) but if the DB was "stable" it would be out of RAM, yes? Or to get to the point why is it still in RAM?

The DB is still in testing, and quite a few people are using it. It has been somewhat stable for a month or so, but we aren't pushing it out on an aggressive schedule because the existing solution works fine given sufficient RAM (so everywhere except lower-end systems). It is critical code and can use even more testing. The performance can also be improved, although if we had to we could live with the current performance.

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.

I thought it was. Just a stealth addy required. There r QR generators I believe.

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.

I thought it was. Just a stealth addy required. There r QR generators I believe.

that should do it, no?

The format of addresses is different and may not "just work" with back end systems. You need a payment Id to identify transactions (or scan on many stealth addresses which is enormously computationally expensive) and you have to understand how to scan for incoming transactions. That's different from BTC where they just arrive on a fixed address. You also have to specify a mix factor on outgoing transactions, but its possible there is a default for that or something. Multisig doesn't exist.

Overall it is not "drop in" the way BTC clones (including DRK and SDC) are.

when sending SDC>SDT(shadow tokens) or SDT>SDT or SDT>SDC (all of which require stealth addys) the wallet has a "Suggest Ring Size" button which a user normally hits before sending. The typical values range from a ringsize of 16 to 60. Transactions fees are small (0.005-0.01 depending on ringsize iirc) annd the tx;s go thru very fast (1 min blocks)

I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

It's in the white paper section 5.1

Quote

The affine coordinates are 64 bytes per ring member per coin value.

Shadow also has somewhat larger transactions than XMR too, because it uses fewer denominations (just 1, 3, 4, 5 instead of 1-9). That is an arguable tradeoff but it does make things bigger (to send 9 you have to send 4 and 5, so two sigs, not just 9).